Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage

[Dave Crocker <dhc2 () dcrocker net>]

On 4/9/2014 11:54 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> Basic functionality is seriously and utterly broken ---  that DMARC
> doesn't have a good answer for such situations, is a major indicator
> of its immaturity,  in the sense that it is "Too specific" a solution
> and cannot apply to e-mail in general.
>
> If it were mature: a mechanism would be provided that would allow
> mailing lists to function  without breaking changes such as
> substituting From:.



On 4/9/2014 11:54 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:> Basic functionality is
seriously and utterly broken ---  that DMARC doesn't
> have a good answer for such situations, is a major indicator of its
> immaturity,  in the sense that it is "Too specific" a solution and
> cannot apply to e-mail in general.
>
> If it were mature: a mechanism would be provided that would allow
> mailing lists to function  without breaking changes such as
> substituting From:.



Every tool has limitations.

An 18-wheeler truck is not broken or immature because it fails to corner 
like a Maserati.  A Maserati is not broken or immature because it does 
not have the carrying capacity of an 18-wheeler.

DMARC was designed to handle a particular usage scenario and its 
limitations have been carefully documented.


Or perhaps we need to declare email broken and immature because it does 
not (yet) satisfy a long list of entirely reasonable functional 
requirements, such as, ummm, author authentication?

Long deployment and use and deep knowledge don't matter; only satisfying 
someone's list of requirements does?


d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net